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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
GordonX said:
The Dan Markel Case: Watch Your Words About Wendi Adelson
By DAVID LAT
at 7:42 PM
December 19, 2016

This post goes out to all the readers and posters at Websleuths.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/the-dan-markel-case-watch-your-words-about-wendi-adelson/
Click to expand...

It may well be that WA had no involvement in, or prior knowledge of, DM's murder. The evidence released thus far does not, IMHO, come close to proving her involvement beyond a reasonable doubt (as even the prosecutors have conceded). But the notion that WA is going to start suing WS commenters who express a contrary view is preposterous. If she went that route, she'd be opening herself up to extremely invasive discovery, including a deposition in which she'd have to testify, under oath, and in excruciating detail, about every conversation and other interaction she had with her brother, mother, and father over the last few years. No attorney in their right mind (and I include WA's counsel in that category) would advise her to subject herself to that. And there's no way that she would put herself in a position where she might be forced to offer evidence that would incriminate her closest family members.
 
GordonX said:
The Dan Markel Case: Watch Your Words About Wendi Adelson
By DAVID LAT
at 7:42 PM
December 19, 2016

This post goes out to all the readers and posters at Websleuths.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/the-dan-markel-case-watch-your-words-about-wendi-adelson/
Click to expand...

Dang. I had respect for the first half of his post. But then he went way overboard to show how Wendi can actually sue posters due to xyz.

Maybe he should look at the comment sections on the news articles on Facebook.

Now he says that people are being cruel to Wendi without proof of her involvement.

But calling her dead ex hubby a latex didn't help her at all.

Plus if she wants to sue anyone; Then maybe she should sue the boyfriend that told LE about her and Charlie having hitmen discussions.

Even if the conversation was mostly 1 sided.

Oops. Jmo.
 
BSBC said:
It may well be that WA had no involvement in, or prior knowledge of, DM's murder. The evidence released thus far does not, IMHO, come close to proving her involvement beyond a reasonable doubt (as even the prosecutors have conceded). But the notion that WA is going to start suing WS commenters who express a contrary view is preposterous. If she went that route, she'd be opening herself up to extremely invasive discovery, including a deposition in which she'd have to testify, under oath, and in excruciating detail, about every conversation and other interaction she had with her brother, mother, and father over the last few years. No attorney in their right mind (and I include WA's counsel in that category) would advise her to subject herself to that. And there's no way that she would put herself in a position where she might be forced to offer evidence that would incriminate her closest family members.
Click to expand...

yup. Harvard Law? Lat ought to know better.
 
The Dan Markel Case: Watch Your Words About Wendi Adelson
By DAVID LAT
at 7:42 PM
December 19, 2016

This post goes out to all the readers and posters at Websleuths.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/the-d...wendi-adelson/

I am new here so not sure that is quoted correctly. But that is possibly the most ridiculous thing I have read in this case. The things Lat lists as reasons to prove Wendi's innocence are not proof in the least bit. They are arguments...defense counsel-type arguments, quite frankly.

There are many reasons Wendi is a suspect, which have been discussed at great length. For Lat to dismiss all of that, and then pen this manipulative and intimidating writing, is truly laughable. Who is he trying to kid? He can keep telling himself whatever he wants to believe...but he is quite possibly, aside from the Adelson defense team, the only one buying it.

Now I question, why is Lat seemingly trying to scare people into not even discussing Wendi's possible guilt? Where does his devotion to this untenable position come from?

Any reasonable person in the world can see that, most likely (though not proven yet, obviously), Wendi was involved. To argue that she was clueless and innocent with such paltry evidence to support such a position is just strange, really.

Wendi appears to have hated Dan. She showed that in how she left him and divorced him. How she blithely discussed her "latex husband" after his brutal murder. How she stole his name from his children, when they were too young to have a say in the matter.

Her family joked about hiring a hitman to kill Dan. Really? That is not something anyone I know of has ever joked about, even in the midst of the most contentious divorce. The evidence sure points to the fact that her brother and mother were instrumental in setting up a hit on Dan. To think they felt comfortable joking with Wendi about hiring a hitman, but then would actually HIRE a hitman and keep it hidden from her, is not believable. Her act on the interrogation was uncomfortable to watch, knowing what else we now know.

So Lat can keep telling himself whatever he wants to hear, but it only makes him come across as more biased than before. Which I didn't think was possible until now. It brings to mind, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
 
Twister said:
The Dan Markel Case: Watch Your Words About Wendi Adelson
By DAVID LAT
at 7:42 PM
December 19, 2016

This post goes out to all the readers and posters at Websleuths.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/the-d...wendi-adelson/

I am new here so not sure that is quoted correctly. But that is possibly the most ridiculous thing I have read in this case. The things Lat lists as reasons to prove Wendi's innocence are not proof in the least bit. They are arguments...defense counsel-type arguments, quite frankly.

There are many reasons Wendi is a suspect, which have been discussed at great length. For Lat to dismiss all of that, and then pen this manipulative and intimidating writing, is truly laughable. Who is he trying to kid? He can keep telling himself whatever he wants to believe...but he is quite possibly, aside from the Adelson defense team, the only one buying it.

Now I question, why is Lat seemingly trying to scare people into not even discussing Wendi's possible guilt? Where does his devotion to this untenable position come from?

Any reasonable person in the world can see that, most likely (though not proven yet, obviously), Wendi was involved. To argue that she was clueless and innocent with such paltry evidence to support such a position is just strange, really.

Wendi appears to have hated Dan. She showed that in how she left him and divorced him. How she blithely discussed her "latex husband" after his brutal murder. How she stole his name from his children, when they were too young to have a say in the matter.

Her family joked about hiring a hitman to kill Dan. Really? That is not something anyone I know of has ever joked about, even in the midst of the most contentious divorce. The evidence sure points to the fact that her brother and mother were instrumental in setting up a hit on Dan. To think they felt comfortable joking with Wendi about hiring a hitman, but then would actually HIRE a hitman and keep it hidden from her, is not believable. Her act on the interrogation was uncomfortable to watch, knowing what else we now know.

So Lat can keep telling himself whatever he wants to hear, but it only makes him come across as more biased than before. Which I didn't think was possible until now. It brings to mind, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Click to expand...

agreed.
something is off with Lat and this case.
 
Its been 2.5 years since Dan's death. But we've only been able to mention Wendi for the last 3 months.

So her lawyers should reward us. Lol
 
Speaking of lawsuits. Why not write a article on atl about how Dans family should file a civil suit against the Adelsons? This way they can get information, money and pre justice before the Adelsons criminal trial begin. Jmo.
 
GordonX said:
The Dan Markel Case: Watch Your Words About Wendi Adelson
By DAVID LAT
at 7:42 PM
December 19, 2016

This post goes out to all the readers and posters at Websleuths.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/the-dan-markel-case-watch-your-words-about-wendi-adelson/
Click to expand...

"Wendi is not a public figure, and it’s beyond the pale that people are coming after this young lawyer and single mom in an attempt to demonize her."

Always playing the victim...I know KM's lawyers have made much of her status as a single mom to garner some sympathy, but invoking the same defense for Wendi really takes some gall. The reason why she's a single mom is because she chose to divorce Dan in a cruel and cowardly fashion! Moreover, regardless of her involvement (and none has been alleged at this time), according to the prosecution, the divorce set in motion the events that eventually led to the children's' father permanently being removed from the picture.
 
And also - a little note to Lat and WA's attorney, John Lauro. You realize that truth is a defense to defamation, right? So if you sue someone here for defamation against WA for saying "Wendi is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder" and that person pleads truthfulness as an affirmative defense, you open the door to all kinds of discovery about whether or not the statement "Wendi is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder" is actually true. Yeah....not a good idea for your client. There are too many lawyers in this thread for your threats to actually hold water. Thanks for playing, though.
 
friendlyobserver said:
agreed.
something is off with Lat and this case.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

He stated very clearly how he's come to his conclusions.

I may not agree with him on Wendi, but I respect his position.

PS- Lat has posted some very unflattering articles on Wendi, while still maintaining his position.

For instance, this article concludes:

Is Wendi an “inauthentic narcissist” spouting “rehearsed lines”? I’ve defended her before, but I know from my reader mail that many people respectfully dissent.
 
Mr. Lat has managed to do one thing well. He has poked the bears here at WS.....including those who have been hibernating. Good luck with that Mr. L.
Nothing I enjoy more than having my cage rattled.


Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
 
Lat seems to have a serious crush on Wendi, just my opinion from months of reading his blog on this case.
 
I've been following this case closely since the beginning and the one thing I still can`t figure out is why Wendi hated Dan so much. She told everyone that Dan treated her badly - what exactly did he do that was so terrible? I read portions of her self-published, autobiographical novel and all I got was that everything the husband did irritated and annoyed his wife - from giving her a silly-but-endearing pet name to not being tall enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 95 more.
Total: 658 (members: 96, guests: 562)

Online statistics

Members online
96
Guests online
562
Total visitors
658
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,464
Messages
18,239,781
Members
234,378
Latest member
Moebi69
Back
Top